Arkties valdysenos klausimas: konfrontacija ar bendradarbiavimas /
In the context of global climate change and setback of Russia relations with Western countries after the Russia’s stealth war on Ukraine, at first sight the Arctic region might be understood as no exception for conflict. It seems that tension is high as territorial disputes have no solution in sight...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Bachelor Thesis |
| Language: | Lithuanian English |
| Published: |
Institutional Repository of General Jonas Zemaitis Military Academy of Lithuania
2018
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://vb.lka.lt/LKA:ELABAETD25298389&prefLang=en_US |
| Summary: | In the context of global climate change and setback of Russia relations with Western countries after the Russia’s stealth war on Ukraine, at first sight the Arctic region might be understood as no exception for conflict. It seems that tension is high as territorial disputes have no solution in sight (thus, no certainty of authority over carbohydrate resources in the region), while Arctic coastal states are enhancing their military capabilities, in order to prepare for a conflict, as the last resort to defend their interests. However, such an image of the region is identified to be based on false assumptions, since the Arctic could as well be called an exceptional area of international relations: the region is an example for cooperation and institution-based governance, which has proven resilience in the context of significant foreign policy changes of A5 countries elsewhere. Study’s object is cooperation of Arctic countries in A5 format after the year 2014; the aim of the research is to prove that, contrary to assumptions constructed in public and media discourse, the Arctic is rather a region of cooperation, with insignificant conflict potential. Main objectives of the study are: the application of the neoliberal institutionalist theory for the Arctic case, and selection of main variables that lead to strengthening of cooperation; analysis of level and type of cooperation in the region, according to the factors singled out in the theory; analysis of arguments that are critical for cooperation in the Arctic; determination of dominant type of governance in the Arctic, including causality of identified outcomes. Methods applied for the research were the case analysis and analysis of primary and secondary literature sources. The research has proven, that arguments constructing the Arctic, as an object of confrontation, while valid as single facts, examined in a broader context fail to provide with rational insights. Arctic governance, despite war in Ukraine, is still best characterised by cooperation among A5 ... |
|---|